Paul, i understand, i will now work on a better way to figure out the required flags
the latest nightly snapshot does not include the commit i mentionned, and i think it is worth giving it a try (to be 100.0% sure ...) can you please do that tomorrow ? in the mean time, if we (well Ralph indeed) want to release 1.8.4, then simply restore the two config files i mentionned. Cheers, Gilles On 2014/12/17 15:39, Paul Hargrove wrote: > Gilles, > > If I have done my testing correctly (not 100% sure) then adding > "-D_REENTRANT" was NOT sufficient, where "-mt" was. > > I can at least test 1 tarball with one set of configure args each evening. > Anything more than that I cannot commit to. > > My scripts are capable of grabbing the v1.8 nightly instead of the rc if > that helps. > > -Paul > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet < > gilles.gouaillar...@iferc.org> wrote: >> Ralph, >> >> i think that will not work. >> >> here is the full story : >> >> once upon a time, on solaris, we did not try to compile pthread'ed app >> without any special parameters. >> that was a minor annoyance on solaris 10 with old gcc : configure passed a >> flag (-pthread if i remember correctly) >> that was not supported by gcc (at that time) and generated tons of >> warnings. >> when i asked "why don't we just try no special parameter on solaris ?" i >> was replied this is because looong time ago >> openmpi used solaris lwp, so solaris was "special" anyway. >> since solaris is able to build (compile+link) a pthread'ed app without any >> flags, i removed the special case for solaris, >> and no flag was used. >> then i noticed that lead to bad code (errno is global instead of per >> thread specific), so you automatically added -D_REENTRANT >> on solaris (e.g. if the __sun__ macro is defined) >> then i found that solarisstudio compilers do not define the __sun__macro >> automatically (__sun and sun are defined) so i improved >> the test (e.g. we are on solaris if __sun__ or __sun is defined) >> this was merged (yesterday) and is not in rc4 >> >> what we should do know is unclear for me ... >> is -D_REENTRANT enough for gcc compilers on solaris ? >> is -D_REENTRANT *not* enough for solarisstudio compilers on solaris ? >> /* if -D_REENTRANT is *not* enough, then we all we have to do is use -mt >> since that implies -D_REENTRANT */ >> >> >> a working solution (minus the minor annoyance i described earlier) is to >> restore >> config/opal_check_os_flavors.m4 >> config/ompi_config_pthreads.m4 >> >> and then i ll find a better way to correctly set the flags that must be >> used on solaris >> >> that being said, and based on Paul's availability, i d rather have a new >> tarball (rc5?) tested. >> (do we *really* need -mt ? isn't -D_REENTRANT enough ?) >> this tarball must include >> https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi-release/commit/ac8b84ce674b958dbf8c9481b300beeef0548b83 >> >> configury: test the __sun macro to detect solaris OS. >> >> >> FWIW. i was unable to reproduce the problem on solaris 11 with sunstudio >> 12.4 even if i do not use -D_REENTRANT *nor* -mt (!) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gilles >> >> >> On 2014/12/17 15:01, Ralph Castain wrote: >> >> Hi Paul >> >> Can you try the attached patch? It would require running autogen, I fear. >> Otherwise, I can add it to the tarball. >> >> Ralph >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov> >> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> wrote: >> >> Gilles, >> >> The 1.8.3 test works where the 1.8.4rc4 one fails with identical configure >> arguments. >> >> While it may be overkill, I configured 1.8.4rc4 with >> >> CFLAGS="-m64 -mt" --with-wrapper-cflags="-m64 -mt" \ >> LDFLAGS="-mt" --with-wrapper-ldflags="-mt" >> >> The resulting run worked! >> >> So, I very strongly suspect that the problem will be resolved if one >> restores the configure logic that my previous email shows has vanished >> (since that would restore "-mt" to CFLAGS and wrapper cflags). >> >> -Paul >> >> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov> >> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> wrote: >> >> My 1.8.3 build has not completed. >> HOWEVER, I can already see a key difference in the configure step. >> >> In 1.8.3 "-mt" was added AUTOMATICALLY to CFLAGS by configure: >> >> checking if C compiler and POSIX threads work as is... no - Solaris, not >> checked >> checking if C++ compiler and POSIX threads work as is... no - Solaris, >> not checked >> checking if Fortran compiler and POSIX threads work as is... no - >> Solaris, not checked >> checking if C compiler and POSIX threads work with -pthread... no >> checking if C compiler and POSIX threads work with -pthreads... no >> checking if C compiler and POSIX threads work with -mt... yes >> checking if C++ compiler and POSIX threads work with -pthread... yes >> checking if Fortran compiler and POSIX threads work with -pthread... yes >> >> This is not the case in 1.8.4rc4: >> >> checking if C compiler and POSIX threads work as is... yes >> checking if C++ compiler and POSIX threads work as is... yes >> checking if Fortran compiler and POSIX threads work as is... yes >> >> >> So, it looks like a chunk of Solaris-specific configure logic was LOST. >> >> -Paul >> >> >> >> -- >> Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov >> Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group >> Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352 >> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing listde...@open-mpi.org >> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >> Link to this >> post:http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16625.php >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing listde...@open-mpi.org >> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >> >> Link to this post: >> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16626.php >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> de...@open-mpi.org >> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >> Link to this post: >> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16628.php >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16629.php
